philippines cockfighting derby

Stock market today: Wall Street hits records despite tariff talkDisagreement between the U.S. and China is increasing across trade and global influence issues. Reports from the recent Asian economic summit show a bitterness in it. Established economies like the U.S. and Australia want to develop a naval base in Papua New Guinea to contain China. The U.S. is cautioning poorer countries from borrowing money from China. Excerpts below from a BBC report show the deep levels of enmity. Apec summit ends without statement over US-China division - BBC News An Asian economic summit has ended without a formal leaders' statement for the first time because of US-China divisions over trade. The US and China revealed competing visions for the region at the summit. The two countries have been engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war this year. During the summit, the US said it would join Australia in developing a naval base in Papua New Guinea, in an apparent move to curb China's growing influence. Mr Pence later said he was prepared to "more than double" the tariffs imposed on Chinese goods. He also criticised China's massive Belt-and-Road infrastructure programme, warning smaller countries that "opaque" Chinese development loans led to "staggering debt". He urged countries to work with the US instead, saying the US did not "coerce, corrupt or compromise your independence". Old economies are never pleased to see emerging economies that are more flexible, energetic, and pro-active in creating new trade models. The Belt and Road Initiative is a development strategy adopted by the Chinese government involving infrastructure development and investments in Silk Road countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa on both overland and sea routes. Building infrastructure in these countries is a much sounder economic model than locating mobile multi-national enterprises or military bases or occupation. The downside is that it can involve incurring substantial debt which eventually requires getting a country’s finances into better shape to afford repayments in order to own the assets. Beijing’s multi-billions dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been called a Chinese Marshall Plan, a state-backed campaign for global dominance, a stimulus package for a slowing economy, and a massive marketing campaign for something that was already happening – Chinese investment around the world. Between 2014 and 2016, China's total trade volume in the countries along the Belt and Road exceeded $3 trillion, created $1.1 billion revenues, and 180,000 jobs for the countries involved. Is the U.S. losing ground to China? Should countries refrain from borrowing from China? What are the implications for Europe of a prosperous Silk Road economy? The Silk Road really is an attempt to extend Chinese soft power utilising exactly the same free market principles much espoused by the west for much of the last two centuries. Building a base in Papua New Guinea, which I believe is somewhat North of Australia, seems to be out of the strategic plan of drawing new lines further and further back and issuing dire warnings if China dare cross that new line. It was hugely funny watching the Americans in particular warning of China's attempted influence in the South China Sea. The irony was magnificent. It was the equivalent of the Chinese or Russians warning of increased American naval activity off Hawaii. To answer the question- the new Silk Road plans are a solid indicator that Beijing understands exactly what Washington was preaching through World Trade Organisation talks for many decades middleground said: Disagreement between the U.S. and China is increasing across trade and global influence issues. Reports from the recent Asian economic summit show a bitterness in it. Established economies like the U.S. and Australia want to develop a naval base in Papua New Guinea to contain China. The U.S. is cautioning poorer countries from borrowing money from China. Excerpts below from a BBC report show the deep levels of enmity. Apec summit ends without statement over US-China division - BBC News An Asian economic summit has ended without a formal leaders' statement for the first time because of US-China divisions over trade. The US and China revealed competing visions for the region at the summit. The two countries have been engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war this year. During the summit, the US said it would join Australia in developing a naval base in Papua New Guinea, in an apparent move to curb China's growing influence. Mr Pence later said he was prepared to "more than double" the tariffs imposed on Chinese goods. He also criticised China's massive Belt-and-Road infrastructure programme, warning smaller countries that "opaque" Chinese development loans led to "staggering debt". He urged countries to work with the US instead, saying the US did not "coerce, corrupt or compromise your independence". Old economies are never pleased to see emerging economies that are more flexible, energetic, and pro-active in creating new trade models. The Belt and Road Initiative is a development strategy adopted by the Chinese government involving infrastructure development and investments in Silk Road countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa on both overland and sea routes. Building infrastructure in these countries is a much sounder economic model than locating mobile multi-national enterprises or military bases or occupation. The downside is that it can involve incurring substantial debt which eventually requires getting a country’s finances into better shape to afford repayments in order to own the assets. Beijing’s multi-billions dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been called a Chinese Marshall Plan, a state-backed campaign for global dominance, a stimulus package for a slowing economy, and a massive marketing campaign for something that was already happening – Chinese investment around the world. Between 2014 and 2016, China's total trade volume in the countries along the Belt and Road exceeded $3 trillion, created $1.1 billion revenues, and 180,000 jobs for the countries involved. Is the U.S. losing ground to China? Should countries refrain from borrowing from China? What are the implications for Europe of a prosperous Silk Road economy? Click to expand... There are two types of people those who have money and those who don't. Guess who always comes out on top. Lumpy Talbot said: To answer the question- the new Silk Road plans are a solid indicator that Beijing understands exactly what Washington was preaching through World Trade Organisation talks for many decades Click to expand... Agree China has learned well and are developing quickly and quietly. There should be export opportunities for many European countries if their enterprises are willing to do the work required to develop new markets. A strong Asian-European gateway would be welcome. Is there any region that the US hasn't insulted or attacked recently (apart from Saudi Arabia)? Thinking further on the dynamics of the new Silk Road policy it certainly makes sense from the Chinese point of view. The outlay and scope of the project matches a series of Trade Agreements, with such huge amounts of Chinese infrastructure investment they get to influence the voting patterns at the UN with many countries along the route while simultaneously the US is retracting its spend outside the US and becoming more internally focused (the Chinese have the money to spend, the US doesn't). It is clever in that it is a mix of Monopoly and Risk at exactly the right time. If you think back to Reagan's supercharging the US economy in the 80s which effectively drove the Soviet Union into financial collapse the Americans are in no position to get into an economic pissing match with Beijing so it is the right thing for Beijing to do in filling the international vacuum. They have such huge reserves of foreign currency and the Yuan about to emerge as an exchange currency, along with the ability to directly intervene in domestic economics way beyond any level that could be contemplated in the west, that they really are the bankers in the Monopoly game now. And the Silk Road project gives them a strategic spending target allied to both economic and political gains. As for the winners and losers, the countries along the route closest to Chinese interests probably won't feel any different. It gets interesting as you get to Pakistan and India, where India is fuming about the Chinese infrastructure spend in Pakistan and refusing to have anything to do with the Silk Road project accordingly, which doesn't bother China or Pakistan all that much. The western European plans will be interesting- I believe significant infrastructure projects and new links are planned right through to Rotterdam. Might give some European countries a bit more hesitation in following the US line on voting at the UN ultimately. Heh- just remembered that the High Speed Rail Line between London and the Channel Tunnel is already owned by a subsidiary company owned ultimately by Li Ka-Shing, the multibillionaire who is a senior economic advisor to the politburo in Beijing. Socratus O' Pericles said: There are two types of people those who have money and those who don't. Guess who always comes out on top. Click to expand... Those who print it! Socratus O' Pericles said: There are two types of people those who have money and those who don't. Guess who always comes out on top. Click to expand... Yes two types of persons but three types of empire: past, present, and future. It will be future empires that will have the money! Around 90 countries in the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) so it is much different than more recent bilateral engagements by the U.S. Infrastructural projects deliver employment at local level even if it is only housing and feeding the workers. The Belt and Road Initiative: Country Profiles | HKTDC The future will be a bullet train across Europe and Asia. middleground said: Yes two types of persons but three types of empire: past, present, and future. It will be future empires that will have the money! Around 90 countries in the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) so it is much different than more recent bilateral engagements by the U.S. Infrastructural projects deliver employment at local level even if it is only housing and feeding the workers. The Belt and Road Initiative: Country Profiles | HKTDC Click to expand... I agree. The Chinese have money and lots of it and are posseors of a model that will make many trillions more. Exaggeration of THEIR debt problem is nonsense: Most people think of China's growth coming from its burgeoning export sector. But it has a very strong domestic economy and a large public spending program – its called ‘nation building’. ... [T]here is no discussion [in China] about the country drowning in debt and all of that nonsense. [The Chinese] know full well that they are sovereign in their own currency and can deficit spend to further their sense of public purpose." : From "The government really is instrumental in creating growth" by Bill Mitchell, 20 January 2016 Click to expand... Here is the start of the EU strategic response to the Belt Road Initiative: Europes Belt and Road | The Diplomat Reminds me of a man at the post-Christmas sales rush, quietly queueing while all the goods are being snatched up by experienced shoppers Not everyone happy about the possible economic changes that the One Belt Initiative may bring to traditional communities according to a BBC website report: Gunmen have killed at least four people in an attack on the Chinese consulate in the Pakistani port city of Karachi. Gunshots were heard at about 09:30 local time (04:30 GMT) outside the consulate in the upmarket Clifton area. Police shot dead three attackers. Separatist militants who oppose Chinese investment projects in western Pakistan say they carried out the attack. China's ambition widens to include Greenland in the One Belt initiative: How Greenland could become China's Arctic base - BBC News middleground said: Yes two types of persons but three types of empire: past, present, and future. It will be future empires that will have the money! Around 90 countries in the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) so it is much different than more recent bilateral engagements by the U.S. Infrastructural projects deliver employment at local level even if it is only housing and feeding the workers. The Belt and Road Initiative: Country Profiles | HKTDC The future will be a bullet train across Europe and Asia. Click to expand... Except China is a nasty totalitarian dictatorship that eats people up and spits them out. Any comparison between it and western democracies are fraudulent. middleground said: Not everyone happy about the possible economic changes that the One Belt Initiative may bring to traditional communities according to a BBC website report: Gunmen have killed at least four people in an attack on the Chinese consulate in the Pakistani port city of Karachi. Gunshots were heard at about 09:30 local time (04:30 GMT) outside the consulate in the upmarket Clifton area. Police shot dead three attackers. Separatist militants who oppose Chinese investment projects in western Pakistan say they carried out the attack. Click to expand... We have a tale of two ports, 100km apart: Chabahar in Iran, developed with Indian support, and China’s Gwadar port in Pakistan. There are teething troubles with both: https://www.newdelhitimes.com/suicide-bomber-attack-irans-chabahar-port/ Karachi attack: A gunfight in Karachi shakes up Pakistan and China's all-weather alliance - The Economic Times China’s relationship with Pakistan involves a lot more money but also far more resentment. The Pakistanis are well aware of Chinese attitudes to Muslims and South Asians and, given Pakistani levels of paranoia never being much being much below 11/10, we should be in for quite the show. In a way the Belt & Road initiative is really just marketing for what has been going on for a long time. For instance in Africa while the West has long walked away it is China that has stepped in to build infrastructure, power plants, ports, railways and healthcare etc. This has been going on for so long now, that it is what was really behind George W Bush suddenly professing concern over Africa and boosting AIDS spending, if any of you remember that far back. But as usual with the US it was too little, too late, with no strategic long-term commitment and follow-through. In another sense it is an interesting throwback 2000 years to the era of the Roman and Han empires, except with modern technology, telecoms and transport links, which could have interesting and unforeseeable consequences. There's also more than a touch of Mackinder's century-old Heartland/World-Island theory of geo-political dominance. Definitely one to watch - though, as with Mao and the French Revolution, we'll all be long dead before the full implications and consequences of this become obvious. It's way too big and complicated to make specific predictions about the project as a whole. Its success or otherwise will be based on the extent to which the projects service existing demand or create new demand. Chinese infrastructural investment is massively inefficient in some respects and utterly awe-inspiring in other respects. It's hard to apply a hard and fast rule to something that is half-politics and half-economics. However I hope it works out as economic growth on that scale is definitely not a zero sum game. Maybe the U.S. will make it illegal for countries to cooperate together on the Silk road? Congress beating a drum about NOPEC with threat of sanctions against countries that collaborate to work together for a stable oil market: Bill allowing U.S. to sue OPEC drawing renewed interest | Reuters What's next will the EU be sanctioned as an illegal cartel? middleground said: Maybe the U.S. will make it illegal for countries to cooperate together on the Silk road? Congress beating a drum about NOPEC with threat of sanctions against countries that collaborate to work together for a stable oil market: Bill allowing U.S. to sue OPEC drawing renewed interest | Reuters What's next will the EU be sanctioned as an illegal cartel? Click to expand... The US would be outraged by a similar infringement of its own sovereignty.philippines cockfighting derby 。

NoneNEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stocks rose to records Tuesday after Donald Trump’s latest talk about tariffs created only some ripples on Wall Street, even if they could roil the global economy were they to take effect. The S&P 500 climbed 0.6% to top the all-time high it set a couple weeks ago. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 123 points, or 0.3%, to its own record set the day before, while the Nasdaq composite gained 0.6% as Microsoft and Big Tech led the way. Stock markets abroad mostly fell after President-elect Trump said he plans to impose sweeping new tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China once he takes office. But the movements were mostly modest. Stock indexes were down 0.1% in Shanghai and nearly flat in Hong Kong, while Canada’s main index edged down by less than 0.1%. Trump has often praised the use of tariffs , but investors are weighing whether his latest threat will actually become policy or is just an opening point for negotiations. For now, the market seems to be taking it more as the latter. The consequences otherwise for markets and the global economy could be painful. Unless the United States can prepare alternatives for the autos, energy products and other goods that come from Mexico, Canada and China, such tariffs would raise the price of imported items all at once and make households poorer, according to Carl Weinberg and Rubeela Farooqi, economists at High Frequency Economics. They would also hurt profit margins for U.S. companies, while raising the threat of retaliatory tariffs by other countries. And unlike tariffs in Trump’s first term, his latest proposal would affect products across the board. General Motors sank 9%, and Ford Motor fell 2.6% because both import automobiles from Mexico. Constellation Brands, which sells Modelo and other Mexican beer brands in the United States, dropped 3.3%. The value of the Mexican peso fell 1.8% against the U.S. dollar. Beyond the pain such tariffs would cause U.S. households and businesses, they could also push the Federal Reserve to slow or even halt its cuts to interest rates. The Fed had just begun easing its main interest rate from a two-decade high a couple months ago to offer support for the job market . While lower interest rates can boost the economy, they can also offer more fuel for inflation. “Many” officials at the Fed’s last meeting earlier this month said they should lower rates gradually, according to minutes of the meeting released Tuesday afternoon. The talk about tariffs overshadowed another mixed set of profit reports from U.S. retailers that answered few questions about how much more shoppers can keep spending. They’ll need to stay resilient after helping the economy avoid a recession, despite the high interest rates imposed by the Fed to get inflation under control. A report on Tuesday from the Conference Board said confidence among U.S. consumers improved in November, but not by as much as economists expected. Kohl’s tumbled 17% after its results for the latest quarter fell short of analysts’ expectations. CEO Tom Kingsbury said sales remain soft for apparel and footwear. A day earlier, Kingsbury said he plans to step down as CEO in January. Ashley Buchanan, CEO of Michaels and a retail veteran, will replace him. Best Buy fell 4.9% after likewise falling short of analysts’ expectations. Dick’s Sporting Goods topped forecasts for the latest quarter thanks to a strong back-to-school season, but its stock lost an early gain to fall 1.4%. Still, more stocks rose in the S&P 500 than fell. J.M. Smucker had one of the biggest gains and climbed 5.7% after topping analysts’ expectations for the latest quarter. CEO Mark Smucker credited strength for its Uncrustables, Meow Mix, Café Bustelo and Jif brands. Big Tech stocks also helped prop up U.S. indexes. Gains of 3.2% for Amazon and 2.2% for Microsoft were the two strongest forces lifting the S&P 500. All told, the S&P 500 rose 34.26 points to 6,021.63. The Dow gained 123.74 to 44,860.31, and the Nasdaq composite climbed 119.46 to 19,174.30. In the bond market, Treasury yields held relatively steady following their big drop from a day before driven by relief following Trump’s pick for Treasury secretary. The yield on the 10-year Treasury inched up to 4.29% from 4.28% late Monday, but it’s still well below the 4.41% level where it ended last week. In the crypto market, bitcoin continued to pull back after topping $99,000 for the first time late last week. It’s since dipped back toward $91,000, according to CoinDesk. It’s a sharp turnaround from the bonanza that initially took over the crypto market following Trump’s election. That boom had also appeared to have spilled into some corners of the stock market. Strategists at Barclays Capital pointed to stocks of unprofitable companies, along with other areas that can be caught up in bursts of optimism by smaller-pocketed “retail” investors. AP Business Writer Elaine Kurtenbach contributed. Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission. Stay up-to-date on the latest in local and national government and political topics with our newsletter.

Education loan provider, Credila Financial Services, previously known as HDFC Credila Financial Services Ltd, has submitted documents to the market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for an initial public offering (IPO) via the confidential pre-filing route. This approach enables the company to keep certain details of the draft red herring prospectus (DRHP) undisclosed to the public for the time being. In an official statement on Friday, Credila stated that it has " filed pre-draft red herring prospectus with the SEBI and stock exchanges ... in relation to the proposed initial public offering of its equity shares on the main board.” This development comes at the time of a major shift in the company's ownership structure during the financial year that ended on March 31, 2024. A private equity consortium consisting of EQT and ChrysCapital acquired a 90.01 per cent stake in Credila for Rs 9,060 crore, which included a fresh equity infusion of Rs 2,003.61 crore. Of this total, Rs 700 crore was invested in June 2023 by the previous owner, HDFC Ltd, while the remaining Rs 1,303.61 crore was contributed in March 2024 by entities from EQT and ChrysCapital. The private equity consortium, consisting of EQT and ChrysCapital, valued Credila at a pre-money valuation of Rs 10,350 crore. As of March 31, 2024, EQT holds a 72.01 per cent stake, ChrysCapital owns 18 per cent, and HDFC Bank retains a 9.99 per cent share. This change in ownership followed the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) directive for HDFC Bank to reduce its stake in Credila to below 10 per cent after the merger of HDFC Ltd. with HDFC Bank. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, Credila experienced robust growth, with total income soaring to Rs 2,771.04 crore from Rs 1,352.18 crore in the previous year. Its profit after tax nearly doubled, rising to Rs 528.84 crore from Rs 275.92 crore. Since its founding, Credila has provided education loans to over 1.24 lakh students. Also Read: India Chooses Luxury Cars, Report Says Over 6 Vehicles Priced Over Rs 50 Lakh Get Sold Every Hour In 2024

XLIII Jose Marsal Caballero de Denia FM Awards ceremony

M/I Homes CEO Robert Schottenstein sells $828,690 in stock

CPN (Maoist Centre) Chairperson Prachanda takes stock of Baidhya's health

Technology and TV writer Sign up to our weekly newsletter , sent on Wednesdays Did you know with an ad-lite subscription to Harborough Mail, you get 70% fewer ads while viewing the news that matters to you. The winner of Great British Bake Off has been crowned. Three bakers competed in the grand final on Channel 4. GBBO’s 15th season has come to an end after 10 exciting episodes. The Great British Bake Off has come to an exciting conclusion as the winner for 2024 was crowned. Just three bakers were left in the famous tent after Gill was sent home in the semi-final last week. Christiaan, Dylan and Georgie were the contestants who competed for the crown on Tuesday November 26. Advertisement Advertisement Fans were warned to avoid making a mistake that could cost them a four figure fine, ahead of the final. While I have previously reported on if and how you can watch previous seasons on demand. Stay up-to-date with the latest UK news and culture with our free UK Today newsletter. Who was the favourite - before the final? According to the bookies, Dylan was the favourite ahead of Christiaan and then Georgie. At least that was the case before the final began on Channel 4. But Dylan really struggled in the first two challenges, leaving fans to take to social media and say the same thing . Who won the Great British Bake Off 2024? The winner of GBBO was Georgie. They were crowned after three intense challenges. Advertisement Advertisement What happened in the final? The judges avoided shaking the format up too much for the final of The Great British Bake Off in 2024. It featured all three of the challenges that the bakers - and audiences - are familiar with after the last 10 weeks. First up was a signature bake, in which the bakers had to make 24 scones. They had to make 12 sweet and 12 savoury - with Christiaan getting the best feedback, while the two others had more mixed results. Read More Waitrose Christmas advert 2024: who stole the bauble dessert - how to watch part two Is I’m a Celeb on at the same time as the Great British Bake Off final? How to watch both The Great British Bake Off 2024: fans are all saying the same thing about Dylan in the final Then came the technical challenge, set by Prue Leith. It saw the bakers tasked with making an afternoon tea display, including a bread roll, strawbery tart and sponge cake - and of course it was judged blind, as it always is. Dylan was ranked third, having struggled across all three bakes. Georgie was in second and Christiaan won the technical challenge - continuing his strong start to the final. Advertisement Advertisement Finally, the bakers had to take on the last showstopper challenge of the season was to bake a hanging three tiered cake, fit for a garden party and they had four and a half hours. Dylan slighly redeemed himself with his ‘abstract’ showstopper - although Paul found some flaws in the cake. Georgie’s cake was labelled ‘delicious’. After the three rounds, the judges crowned Georgie as the winner. What did you think of the Great British Bake Off final? Share your thoughts by emailing me: [email protected] . National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.

Consideration given to recruiting 50% women to newly formed PSNI, records showNew research shows restaurant chains and food concepts are helping shopping malls regain their footing, driving consumers to the once-struggling spaces. The data from Yelp shows restaurants have become a driving force in this ever-changing retail landscape, helping to catapult visitor numbers above pre-pandemic levels at malls. Shoppers grab a bite to eat and then spend their money at various businesses before and after they dine out — creating a bounce-back effect for what has often been dubbed a "struggling industry." Days of packed shopping malls are beginning to return, but they look a bit different than what we were used to in the 1990s and early 2000s. RELATED STORY | Retailers say they're ready for potential Trump tariffs Take a drive past or step foot near Great Northern Mall in Ohio and you'll be greeted by one restaurant after the next. More are on the way, including a Texas Roadhouse in the near future. "Five times more traffic," Tony Ke, the owner of TJ Hibachi and Sushi said. Ke said through the ups and downs of the coronavirus pandemic, and many folks opting for online shopping over the years, things are finally turning around. He said business is booming with five times more traffic in the mall food court than in years past. "It's really getting better and better," Ke said. And he's not alone. Scripps News Cleveland followed through and spoke with Beverly Bolton, owner of Fortune's Cookies. The self-proclaimed community baker and Cleveland-area mom took a gamble, opening her first brick-and-mortar inside Great Northern a year ago. "It's been an adventure, but better than I expected," Bolton said. The local cookie shop has become so popular that she's been scouted to fill that nostalgic mall cookie void. "We've had some other malls approach us. Actually, use the space where Mrs. Fields used to be in," Bolton said. RELATED STORY | Big Lots continues some store closures as its bankruptcy proceeds Placer.AI reports shopping malls — whether it be open-air concepts or traditional malls like Great Northern — are on the rise again in 2024. The organization that tracks retail foot traffic reports the primary reason is restaurants and food concepts in malls. They are up 7% from 2019 to 2024. Yelp recently released a report of the top 25 mall brands, and 17 of the top 25 mall brands are restaurant chains: Cheesecake Factory at number 1 BJ's Restaurant and Brewhouse at 4 Starbucks at 6 Olive Garden at 7 Panera at 10 Chili's at 21 Food concepts are a driving force as well. This includes Filipino, Vegan and specifically Bubble Teas —which are up 100% over the last five years, according to Yelp. Michael Goldberg, a professor in the Department of Design Innovation at the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University, said a generation that has virtually lived online plays a critical role in the process. "Many Americans, particularly younger Americans, are focused on experiences and nothing is better than sharing food with friends," Goldberg said. Young social media influencers are eating food on camera, providing reviews and driving people to dive in and try the food. The TikTok generation has given a major boost to once-struggling brands and revived them tenfold. Case in point: Chili's Triple Dipper. "The thought that Chili's is back and being driven by influencer videos on TikTok is quite fascinating and, you know, I mean, there is a nostalgia for brands," Goldberg said. Localized community programming and holiday events like pictures with Santa are a mainstay at malls like Great Northern. Lori Weidleman, who has been cranking out pretzels at Auntie Anne's since 1997, said change is constant. However, she added it's become apparent people will pay for a quality product that takes them back to a special moment in life. "Ohio's doing really good. We're strong and beating our goals and our targets. And it's multi-generational interest," Weidleman said. This story was originally published by Mike Holden at Scripps News Cleveland .Budgetary system & fiscal governance

Newsquawk Week Ahead: US PCE, FOMC Minutes, RBNZ rate decision, EZ HICP, and Aussie CPI - ForexLive

GM proves that big moves are restructuring on the fly as uncertainty looms in 2025NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stocks rose to records Tuesday after Donald Trump’s latest talk about tariffs created only some ripples on Wall Street, even if they could roil the global economy were they to take effect. The S&P 500 climbed 0.6% to top the all-time high it set a couple weeks ago. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 123 points, or 0.3%, to its own record set the day before, while the Nasdaq composite gained 0.6% as Microsoft and Big Tech led the way. Stock markets abroad mostly fell after President-elect Trump said he plans to impose sweeping new tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China once he takes office. But the movements were mostly modest. Stock indexes were down 0.1% in Shanghai and nearly flat in Hong Kong, while Canada’s main index edged down by less than 0.1%. Trump has often praised the use of tariffs , but investors are weighing whether his latest threat will actually become policy or is just an opening point for negotiations. For now, the market seems to be taking it more as the latter. The consequences otherwise for markets and the global economy could be painful. Unless the United States can prepare alternatives for the autos, energy products and other goods that come from Mexico, Canada and China, such tariffs would raise the price of imported items all at once and make households poorer, according to Carl Weinberg and Rubeela Farooqi, economists at High Frequency Economics. They would also hurt profit margins for U.S. companies, while raising the threat of retaliatory tariffs by other countries. And unlike tariffs in Trump’s first term, his latest proposal would affect products across the board. General Motors sank 9%, and Ford Motor fell 2.6% because both import automobiles from Mexico. Constellation Brands, which sells Modelo and other Mexican beer brands in the United States, dropped 3.3%. The value of the Mexican peso fell 1.8% against the U.S. dollar. Beyond the pain such tariffs would cause U.S. households and businesses, they could also push the Federal Reserve to slow or even halt its cuts to interest rates. The Fed had just begun easing its main interest rate from a two-decade high a couple months ago to offer support for the job market . While lower interest rates can boost the economy, they can also offer more fuel for inflation. “Many” officials at the Fed’s last meeting earlier this month said they should lower rates gradually, according to minutes of the meeting released Tuesday afternoon. The talk about tariffs overshadowed another mixed set of profit reports from U.S. retailers that answered few questions about how much more shoppers can keep spending. They’ll need to stay resilient after helping the economy avoid a recession, despite the high interest rates imposed by the Fed to get inflation under control. A report on Tuesday from the Conference Board said confidence among U.S. consumers improved in November, but not by as much as economists expected. Kohl’s tumbled 17% after its results for the latest quarter fell short of analysts’ expectations. CEO Tom Kingsbury said sales remain soft for apparel and footwear. A day earlier, Kingsbury said he plans to step down as CEO in January. Ashley Buchanan, CEO of Michaels and a retail veteran, will replace him. Best Buy fell 4.9% after likewise falling short of analysts’ expectations. Dick’s Sporting Goods topped forecasts for the latest quarter thanks to a strong back-to-school season, but its stock lost an early gain to fall 1.4%. Still, more stocks rose in the S&P 500 than fell. J.M. Smucker had one of the biggest gains and climbed 5.7% after topping analysts’ expectations for the latest quarter. CEO Mark Smucker credited strength for its Uncrustables, Meow Mix, Café Bustelo and Jif brands. Big Tech stocks also helped prop up U.S. indexes. Gains of 3.2% for Amazon and 2.2% for Microsoft were the two strongest forces lifting the S&P 500. All told, the S&P 500 rose 34.26 points to 6,021.63. The Dow gained 123.74 to 44,860.31, and the Nasdaq composite climbed 119.46 to 19,174.30. In the bond market, Treasury yields held relatively steady following their big drop from a day before driven by relief following Trump’s pick for Treasury secretary. The yield on the 10-year Treasury inched up to 4.29% from 4.28% late Monday, but it’s still well below the 4.41% level where it ended last week. In the crypto market, bitcoin continued to pull back after topping $99,000 for the first time late last week. It’s since dipped back toward $91,000, according to CoinDesk. It’s a sharp turnaround from the bonanza that initially took over the crypto market following Trump’s election. That boom had also appeared to have spilled into some corners of the stock market. Strategists at Barclays Capital pointed to stocks of unprofitable companies, along with other areas that can be caught up in bursts of optimism by smaller-pocketed “retail” investors. AP Business Writer Elaine Kurtenbach contributed. Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission. Get the latest local business news delivered FREE to your inbox weekly.

The Irish Government wanted to appeal to the UK side against ‘manipulating’ every scenario for favourable election results in Northern Ireland. The UK Government was warned that a “save David campaign” for UUP leader Lord Trimble would ruin progress made under the Good Friday Agreement. Extensive confidential documents in the lead-up to the collapse of Northern Ireland’s institutions in 2002 have been made available to the public as part of annual releases from the Irish National Archives. They reveal that the Irish Government wanted to appeal to the UK side against “manipulating” every scenario for favourable election results in Northern Ireland, in an effort to protect the peace process. In the years after the landmark 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a number of outstanding issues left the political environment fraught with tension and disagreement. Mr Trimble, who won a Nobel Peace Prize with SDLP leader John Hume for their work on the Agreement, was keen to gain wins for the UUP on policing, ceasefire audits and paramilitary disarmament – but also to present his party as firmer on these matters amid swipes from its Unionist rival, the DUP. These issues were at the front of his mind as he tried to steer his party into Assembly elections planned for May 2003 and continue in his role as the Executive’s first minister despite increasing political pressure. The documents reveal the extent to which the British and Irish Governments were trying to delicately resolve the contentious negotiations, conscious that moves seen as concessions to one group could provoke anger on the other side. In June 2002, representatives of the SDLP reported to Irish officials on a recent meeting between Mr Hume’s successor Mark Durkan and Prime Minister Tony Blair on policing and security. Mr Blair is said to have suggested that the SDLP and UUP were among those who both supported and took responsibility for the Good Friday Agreement. The confidential report of the meeting says that Mr Durkan, the deputy First Minister, was not sure that Mr Trimble had been correctly categorised. The Prime Minister asked if the SDLP could work more closely with the UUP ahead of the elections. Mr Durkan argued that Mr Trimble was not only not saleable to nationalists, but also not saleable to half of the UUP – to which Mr Blair and Northern Ireland Secretary John Reid are said to have laughed in agreement. The SDLP leader further warned that pursuing a “save David” campaign would ruin all they had worked for. Damien McAteer, an adviser for the SDLP, was recorded as briefing Irish officials on September 10 that it was his view that Mr Trimble was intent on collapsing the institutions in 2003 over expected fallout for Sinn Fein in the wake of the Colombia Three trial, where men linked to the party were charged with training Farc rebels – but predicted the UUP leader would be “in the toilet” by January, when an Ulster Unionist Council (UUC) meeting was due to take place. A week later in mid September, Mr Trimble assured Irish premier Bertie Ahern that the next UUC meeting to take place in two days’ time would be “okay but not great” and insisted he was not planning to play any “big game”. It was at that meeting that he made the bombshell announcement that the UUP would pull out of the Executive if the IRA had not disbanded by January 18. The move came as a surprise to the Irish officials who, along with their UK counterparts, did not see the deadline as realistic. Sinn Fein described the resolution as a “wreckers’ charter”. Doubts were raised that there would be any progress on substantive issues as parties would not be engaged in “pre-election skirmishing”. As that could lead to a UUP walkout and the resulting suspension of the institutions, the prospect of delaying the elections was raised while bringing forward the vote was ruled out. Therefore, the two Governments stressed the need to cooperate as a stabilising force to protect the Agreement – despite not being sure how that process would survive through the January 18 deadline. The Irish officials became worried that the British side did not share their view that Mr Trimble was not “salvageable” and that the fundamental dynamic in the UUP was now Agreement scepticism, the confidential documents state. In a meeting days after the UUC announcements, Mr Reid is recorded in the documents as saying that as infuriating as it was, Mr Trimble was at that moment the “most enlightened Unionist we have”. The Secretary said he would explore what the UUP leader needed to “survive” the period between January 18 and the election, believing a significant prize could avoid him being “massacred”. Such planning went out the window just weeks later, when hundreds of PSNI officers were involved in raids of several buildings – including Sinn Fein’s offices in Stormont. The resulting “Stormontgate” spy-ring scandal accelerated the collapse of powersharing, with the UUP pulling out of the institutions – and the Secretary of State suspending the Assembly and Executive on October 14. For his part, Irish officials were briefed that Mr Reid was said to be “gung ho” about the prospect of exercising direct rule – reportedly making no mention of the Irish Government in a meeting with Mr Trimble and Mr Durkan on that day. The Northern Ireland Secretary was given a new role and Paul Murphy was appointed as his successor. A note on speaking points for a meeting with Mr Murphy in April showed that the Irish side believed the May elections should go ahead: “At a certain stage the political process has to stand on its own feet. “The Governments cannot be manipulating and finessing every scenario to engineer the right result. “We have to start treating the parties and the people as mature and trusting that they have the discernment to make the right choices.” However, the elections planned for May did not materialise, instead delayed until November. Mr Trimble would go on to lose his Westminster seat – and stewardship of the UUP – in 2005. The November election saw the DUP emerge as the largest parties – but direct rule continued as Ian Paisley’s refused to share power with Sinn Fein, which Martin McGuinness’ colleagues. The parties eventually agreed to work together following further elections in 2007. – This article is based on documents in 2024/130/5, 2024/130/6, 2024/130/15

Died: December 29th, 2024 The death at 100 of the US’s 39th and longest living president , James Earl Carter, a peanut farmer and Baptist preacher, sees the passing of a remarkable Southerner who infused his politics with a rare down-to-earth moralism, sincerity and honesty. A refreshing outsider to Washington politics, he surprised all by sweeping aside the capital’s old post-Watergate elite to leave a legacy that pointed in new directions even if it never quite achieved his promise. “He decided to use power righteously,” biographer Kai Bird would write, “ignore politics, and do the right thing. He was, in fact, a fan of the establishment’s favourite Protestant theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, who wrote, ‘It is the sad duty of politics to establish justice in a sinful world’.” Although he had notable successes in office from 1977 to 1981, not least the Camp David Accord between Egypt and Israel, he would be the first incumbent president since Herbert Hoover in 1932 to lose a re-election bid. Ronald Reagan used the economic challenges and oil crisis faced by his administration, and the disastrously bungled attempted Iran hostage rescue, to successfully portray Carter as a weak and ineffectual leader. In some ways Carter was a paradox. Although an opponent of segregation in a segregationist state, he played the race card to get elected to governorship in 1971, then announcing that “the time of racial discrimination is over”. From then on, however, he was an unwavering champion of civil rights, and his presidential bid attracted some 85 per cent support from the black community. Born on October 1st, 1924, in tiny Plains, Georgia, to Bessie Lillian Gordy and James Earl Carter snr, a shopkeeper and investor in farmland, the young Carter would successfully develop a peanut farm as an offshoot of the family business. His father was a descendant of English immigrant Thomas Carter, who settled in the Colony of Virginia in 1635. Carter enrolled in the US Naval Academy in 1946 and while there met and married Rosalynn Smith, a friend of his sister’s. He served in nuclear submarines, and was drafted in to assist in the dismantling of the Chalk River nuclear reactor in Canada following a partial meltdown. His experience, he would later say, shaped his views on atomic energy and led him to end development of the neutron bomb. The early death of his father saw his return to the family business and a gradual immersion in the Democratic politics of Georgia. Although opposed to segregation – as a member of the Baptist Church he spoke openly against racism and attempts to segregate worship – he tempered his approach when he ran for office, even courting the arch-segregationist Wallace vote. Still an outsider in national politics, he surprised observers by winning the 1976 Democratic presidential nomination and narrowly defeating incumbent Republican president Gerald Ford. As the campaign developed in the wake of the still-fresh reverberations of the Watergate scandal, Carter, now with running mate senator Walter Mondale, tirelessly travelled the country projecting himself as an outsider with an easy common touch, not averse to populist slogans. He won the popular vote by 50.1 per cent to 48.0 per cent. Within two days of assuming the presidency he took the controversial step of pardoning all Vietnam War draft evaders. Carter was actively engaged on the world stage, from day one, hoping above all to broker peace in the Middle East. He invited Egyptian president Anwar Sadat and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin to the presidential lodge Camp David in September 1978 with the negotiations resulting in an end to the state of war between the two countries, Egypt formally recognising Israel for the first time, and the creation of an elected government in the West Bank and Gaza. [ Leo Varadkar could learn something from Jimmy Carter about how to retire Opens in new window ] He oversaw the return of the Panama Canal to Panama, and signed the landmark Salt II treaty on ballistic arms reductions with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. (Although the latter was signed in 1979 in Vienna, the US Senate refused to ratify it in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.) Following that invasion, Carter allowed the sale of military supplies to China and started talks about sharing military intelligence. He began a programme of what would become hugely controversial covert assistance to the Afghan mujahideen, some of them precursors to today’s Taliban. He sought closer relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), continuing the rapprochement engaged in by Richard Nixon. The end of his presidency was blighted by the Iran hostage crisis. Misbriefed by the CIA about the stability of the Shah’s regime, Carter pledged in 1977 that his administration would continue with positive relations between the US and Iran, calling the latter “strong, stable and progressive”. After the surprise revolution installed an Islamist regime in November 1979, a group of Iranian students took over the US embassy in Tehran. Fifty-two American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for the next 444 days. An airborne mission to free them failed, leaving eight American servicemen dead and two aircraft destroyed. The hostages were freed immediately after Ronald Reagan succeeded Carter as president – leading figures in the Reagan campaign are reported to have signalled to the Iranians not to release the hostages until Carter was defeated, as Reagan would give them a better deal. Breaking with traditional US unwillingness to step out of line from its closest ally, the UK, Carter in 1977 agreed to issue a declaration on Ireland calling for the establishment in Northern Ireland of a government which would command widespread acceptance and for an overall solution which would involve the support of the Irish government. The US would facilitate any such agreement with assistance in creating jobs, he said. “The precedent created by Carter has facilitated the enormous involvement in Ireland of his successors,” Ireland’s then-ambassador to the US, Sean Donlon, has written. It was an engagement and pledge that would be honoured by Reagan in his talks with British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, and in the establishment of the International Fund for Ireland. The latter has seen close to $1 billion invested in Irish projects since then. In 1979, Carter invited taoiseach Jack Lynch on an official visit to the US and paid a private visit to Ireland in 1995, fishing in Kilkenny and indulging his woodworking skills by helping to build a house in Ballyfermot for Habitat for Humanity, an NGO he worked closely with. Domestically, Carter had an uneasy relationship with both his own party and Republicans in Congress. His tenure in office was marked by an economic malaise, a time of continuing inflation and recession, and the 1979 energy crisis. His administration established the department of energy and the department of education. He also created a national energy policy that included conservation, price control, and new technology. He installed solar water heating panels on the White House and wore sweaters to offset turning down the heat. He deregulated the airline industry, paving the way for middle-class Americans to fly for the first time in large numbers, and deregulated natural gas, laying the groundwork for the country’s current energy independence. He forced through the Alaska Land Act, tripling the size of the nation’s protected wilderness areas. The battle for renomination loomed. Carter had to run against his own stagflation-ridden economy, while the hostage crisis in Iran dominated the news every week. He alienated liberal college students, who were expected to be his base, by reinstating registration for the military draft. [ ‘He’s an inspiration’: tributes pour in after Jimmy Carter enters hospice care Opens in new window ] Though initially trailing Carter by several points, Reagan saw a surge in polling after the TV debate, in which he practised the patronising put-down – “there you go again” – that became his election mantra. Carter’s defeat was a landslide. After leaving the White House, he became an activist former president, ploughing a largely solitary but effective furrow. In the view of many it is his retirement that will be seen as his singular legacy. In 1982, he established the Carter Center to promote and expand human rights. Its work would earn him a Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. In July 2007, he joined Nelson Mandela to announce his participation with former president of Ireland Mary Robinson, among others, in The Elders, a group of independent global leaders who work on peace and human rights issues. He travelled extensively to conduct peace negotiations, monitor elections and further the eradication of infectious diseases. He played a key role in the NGO Habitat for Humanity, and wrote books and memoirs, often sharply critical of US policy, not least over the Iraq War. In a work on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict he controversially labelled the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians “apartheid”. Though he praised Barack Obama in the early part of his tenure, Carter attacked the use of drone strikes against suspected terrorists and the decision to keep Guantánamo Bay detention camp open. His blunt critiques of his Democrat successors meant they would all keep him at arm’s length until Joe Biden latterly re-engaged with him enthusiastically. To the end he worked tirelessly. Biographer Bird, who insists that Carter “remains the most misunderstood president of the last century”, described one recent meeting: “He was in his early 90s yet was still rising with the dawn and getting to work early. I once saw him conduct a meeting at 7am at the Carter Center where he spent 40 minutes pacing back and forth onstage, explaining the details of his programme to wipe out Guinea worm disease. He was relentless. Later that day he gave me, his biographer, exactly 50 minutes to talk about his White House years. Those bright blue eyes bore into me with an alarming intensity. But he was clearly more interested in the Guinea worms. “Carter devoted his life to solving problems,” Bird says, “like an engineer, by paying attention to the minutiae of a complicated world. He once told me that he hoped to outlive the last Guinea worm. Last year there were only 13 cases of Guinea worm disease in humans. He may have succeeded.” Rosalynn Carter died in November 2023 and Jimmy Carter emerged from hospice care to mourn her. They had three sons, Jack, Chip and Jeff; one daughter, Amy; nine grandsons (one of whom is deceased), three granddaughters, five great-grandsons, and eight great-granddaughters.